NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Dormant threads from the high school sections are preserved here.
User avatar
Charley Pride
Rikku
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 11:24 pm

NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Charley Pride »

I've kept myself distant from NAQT discussion, primarily because I haven't had much experience with the real problems it poses. It's not even that I wasn't cognizant of what good quiz bowl needed to be or anything, because I've seen and understood issues in the past. Today I was at Winnebago's varsity tourney with Auburn, and I left with a frustration previously unseen following a tournament win. The event used IS-92, if anyone is keeping track. Listed below are my qualms with NAQT, in no particular order.

~Distribution. Everyone talks about NAQT distro, and it continues to be the most egregious aspect of NAQT sets. To be very clear, I don't mind trash in the least bit; my distribution at Auburn FS had 1/1 in every match. The issue is that trash is taking overwhelming precedence over academic topics (if I got $10 for every RMP, social science, or vis arts question, I probably wouldn't have enough money to buy another IS set to complain about). I don't have the set (they didn't pass it out), but judging strictly from impressions, there was more trash than any subcategory besides the lits and probably geography and current events, maybe biology. Furthermore, distro within the trash was stupid, as questions on the same subcategory of subcategories of trash came up in the same packet.

~Distribution II. I can remember probably one physics tossup in the entire set of 8 packets. Lit questions we extremely unbalanced (too much focus on a single type of answer), and there wasn't enough world or European history. This was just a mess, since NAQT screwed up its own screwy distro.

~Question quality. There was so much category mixing (miscegenation, as I call it), bad clues (including at least one leadin that was an outrageous hose), etc. This is probably a little hard to gauge because of the issues surrounding the questions themselves that defied any serious judgment of their quality.

~Difficulty and pertinence.I just couldn't believe how many idiotic answers there were for real categories, and there were several questions (especially bonus parts) that were just too hard. Never in my quiz bowl life have I asked myself "why the hell would someone write a question on that?" more times in a tournament. The answer set gives the impression that NAQT writers often select answers based on the "hm, that would be a fun question to ask!" heuristic. And damn you to the deepst pits of :chip: if you write cross-category math computation.

~Errors in the set. At least one answer was repeated twice, another three times. Not only that, answers were repeated within the same context at least once. Repetition as the day wears on happens, but it should happen minimally in clues and absolutely never in answers. There were also issues with prompts in some places. When stuff like this happens you end up punishing deep knowledge. That sounds familiar, doesn't it?

If NAQT is to justify its existence and maintain any iota of credibility as an academic organization, as it spuriously labels itself, then issues like the ones above need to be resolved or justified right away. Since people are paying good money to see these questions, any question of justification goes out the window. NAQT is truly a lion in a sheep's skin; it presents itself as an alternative to bad quiz bowl, but it carries over many of the very worst aspects of what it professed to replace. This was honestly a worse experience than IHSA state last year. I really don't know what more I can say.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The tournament itself was a beast in its own right. It was organized well and it fulfilled it stated goal all they way: more teams played more scholastic bowl. But there's the issue; this was still scholastic bowl. In mixing in things like afternoon rebracketing with things like the blurt rule, Winnebago created a strange amalgamation of good and bad practices that simply drove me crazy. Quasi-mACF bonuses where painful; one part at a time, but no conferring during the reading of the bonus at all. I guess this isn't a gigantic issue, but it points to a trend in the backwards direction. Morning rounds allowed conferring during the reading of bonus parts, but apparently some teams complained about it (because it was new), and the TDs erred on their side. I understand that you want your teams to be comfortable playing in your tournament, but I think you're only doing them a favor when you introduce a new aspect of the game in a rather docile setting (the middle of the field was pretty even), since that aspect is a symptom of progression. If opponents of mACF cite teamwork as a reason for sticking with old bonuses, then they should have seen Auburn play its playoff matches; we looked bored and stupid at times, and it was a direct result of destroying the essence of mACF bonuses. If teams function better if they can actively confer during a bonus, why not leave the option open?

Another issue was with protests. Official tournament rules stipulated that text on the paper was final, and that there was no room for protests. The packet said something to the effect of "a bad question will be equally bad in all ten rooms". The reason why this is so serious is that no question set can ever guarantee perfection, and you find instances people being robbed of points they earned with real knowledge. Protesting always needs to be an option, and you realize this when you see the agony of a player who gave a right answer that simply did happen to be listed as promptable or acceptable as an alternative.

Winnebago runs an extremely important tournament, since it serves teams that are relatively inexperienced with good quiz bowl. They have the right idea, using a (supposedly) good question source, a (relatively) good format, and employing a (generally) good staff. I can't blame Winnebago for how the questions turned out, and as far as most of the field is concerned, they questions were fine. However, future tournaments would do well to use a set of rules that better facilitate progress in Illinois quiz bowl. When you enforce the blurt rule and have moderators who actively mock the good aspects of the format, you create an environment for more of the stagnation that has plagued Illinois for far too long. I saw some good things from some pretty obscure teams today, and it's this (very) raw talent that needs to be harvested in order to make this state better. The Auburns, the St. Igs, and the Loyolas can get as good as they want, but true progress will come once the more anonymous teams catch up to speed. This tournament and this state as a whole have massive potential, and it's the waste of this potential that bothers me most.


/end huge pontification

EDIT: Formatting
Last edited by BuzzerZen on Sat Jan 16, 2010 10:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Changed title to not include slightly naughty word. —Mgmt.
Zahed Haseeb

Auburn High School 2010
University of Chicago 2014

User avatar
Charley Pride
Rikku
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 11:24 pm

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Charley Pride »

I know this basically loses me the chance of receiving 8 seconds to begin my answer following a buzz at HSNCT, but I guess I can be content with the standard time...
Zahed Haseeb

Auburn High School 2010
University of Chicago 2014

User avatar
Irreligion in Bangladesh
Auron
Posts: 2095
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 1:18 am
Location: Winnebago, IL

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Irreligion in Bangladesh »

Oliver Ellsworth wrote:The tournament itself was a beast in its own right. It was organized well and it fulfilled it stated goal all they way: more teams played more scholastic bowl. But there's the issue; this was still scholastic bowl. In mixing in things like afternoon rebracketing with things like the blurt rule, Winnebago created a strange amalgamation of good and bad practices that simply drove me crazy. Quasi-mACF bonuses where painful; one part at a time, but no conferring during the reading of the bonus at all. I guess this isn't a gigantic issue, but it points to a trend in the backwards direction. Morning rounds allowed conferring during the reading of bonus parts, but apparently some teams complained about it (because it was new), and the TDs erred on their side. I understand that you want your teams to be comfortable playing in your tournament, but I think you're only doing them a favor when you introduce a new aspect of the game in a rather docile setting (the middle of the field was pretty even), since that aspect is a symptom of progression. If opponents of mACF cite teamwork as a reason for sticking with old bonuses, then they should have seen Auburn play its playoff matches; we looked bored and stupid at times, and it was a direct result of destroying the essence of mACF bonuses. If teams function better if they can actively confer during a bonus, why not leave the option open?

Another issue was with protests. Official tournament rules stipulated that text on the paper was final, and that there was no room for protests. The packet said something to the effect of "a bad question will be equally bad in all ten rooms". The reason why this is so serious is that no question set can ever guarantee perfection, and you find instances people being robbed of points they earned with real knowledge. Protesting always needs to be an option, and you realize this when you see the agony of a player who gave a right answer that simply did happen to be listed as promptable or acceptable as an alternative.

Winnebago runs an extremely important tournament, since it serves teams that are relatively inexperienced with good quiz bowl. They have the right idea, using a (supposedly) good question source, a (relatively) good format, and employing a (generally) good staff. I can't blame Winnebago for how the questions turned out, and as far as most of the field is concerned, they questions were fine. However, future tournaments would do well to use a set of rules that better facilitate progress in Illinois quiz bowl. When you enforce the blurt rule and have moderators who actively mock the good aspects of the format, you create an environment for more of the stagnation that has plagued Illinois for far too long. I saw some good things from some pretty obscure teams today, and it's this (very) raw talent that needs to be harvested in order to make this state better. The Auburns, the St. Igs, and the Loyolas can get as good as they want, but true progress will come once the more anonymous teams catch up to speed. This tournament and this state as a whole have massive potential, and it's the waste of this potential that bothers me most.
The bolded is somewhat inaccurate - "going backwards" implies that Bago's done better than this, and that's not true. They only used ACF bonuses on my urging, and my urging isn't enough to convince them to use proper rules. No one involved in the Winnebago program, to my knowledge, actively supports the use of ACF bonuses over IHSA, nor any other aspect of good quizbowl. They only use NAQT questions because that's the option I gave to them last year when they (finally) got rid of Platypus. If there were a question writing company producing IHSA format bonuses and distribution with question quality that didn't make me scream at them, Bago's coaches would use it and not look back. There's absolutely no sense in trying to lump Winnebago's tournament in conversations with "good quizbowl" - they use a question set that is usually of good quality, but that's it.

So that said, I saw one and a half matches of IS 92 and I find it uplifting that I won't see any more of it. My jaw dropped after no less than 4 tossups and 4 bonuses - inane answer selection and immensely poor clue choices for otherwise acceptable answer selection.
Brad Fischer
Head Editor, IHSA State Series
IHSSBCA Ombudsman

Winnebago HS ('06)
Northern Illinois University ('10)
Assistant Coach, IMSA (2010-12)
Coach, Keith Country Day School (2012-16)

User avatar
abnormal abdomen
Rikku
Posts: 346
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 3:58 pm

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by abnormal abdomen »

I think what Zahed means by "going backwards" is just the concept of these examples of "bad quiz bowl" still being very much in effect. Moderators complaining about categories not being read, worrying about blurt rules, stating that we couldn't confer as bonuses were being read, etc are examples of the whole idea of Illinois still very much resisting the movement towards good quiz bowl. Zahed's wording still holds as being a bit strange, but altogether I understand what he means.

It was almost as if some of these people were bitter towards the fact that teams have been embracing good quiz bowl.
Abid Haseeb
Auburn High School '12
Brown University '16
Writer, HSAPQ
Writer, NAQT

Dan-Don
Yuna
Posts: 966
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 11:05 pm
Location: Evanston
Contact:

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Dan-Don »

Oliver Ellsworth wrote:moderators who actively mock the good aspects of the format,
This sounds hilarious. Elaborate?
Dan Donohue, Saint Viator ('10), Northwestern ('14), NAQT

User avatar
Stephen Colbert
Wakka
Posts: 232
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 4:12 am

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Stephen Colbert »

Jacopo Robusti wrote:It was almost as if some of these people were are bitter towards the fact that teams have been embracing good quiz bowl.
At least in Illinois, anyway.
Nathan Hollinsaid
Coach, St. Anthony Streator (2004-2007)
IHSSBCA Performance & Test-Certified Moderator

User avatar
abnormal abdomen
Rikku
Posts: 346
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 3:58 pm

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by abnormal abdomen »

Dan-Don wrote:
Oliver Ellsworth wrote:moderators who actively mock the good aspects of the format,
This sounds hilarious. Elaborate?
Maybe Zahed's referring to something else, but one woman (I'm assuming I shouldn't mention names) said something along the lines of "I wish they'd give us the categories of the questions". Also, she (and someone else, I guess) basically said "Well we can play without the blurt rule, but I think that the blurt rule is good and we're gonna play with it". We were warned a few times about conferring during bonuses.

EDIT: Punctuation
Last edited by abnormal abdomen on Sat Jan 16, 2010 11:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Abid Haseeb
Auburn High School '12
Brown University '16
Writer, HSAPQ
Writer, NAQT

User avatar
CometCoach72
Wakka
Posts: 118
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2009 2:07 pm
Location: Southern IL

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by CometCoach72 »

Jacopo Robusti wrote:I think what Zahed means by "going backwards" is just the concept of these examples of "bad quiz bowl" still being very much in effect. Moderators complaining about categories not being read, worrying about blurt rules, stating that we couldn't confer as bonuses were being read, etc are examples of the whole idea of Illinois still very much resisting the movement towards good quiz bowl. Zahed's wording still holds as being a bit strange, but altogether I understand what he means.

It was almost as if some of these people were bitter towards the fact that teams have been embracing good quiz bowl.

The Turnabout (NAQT format) in Greenville today led to faster matches (the tournament finished 15 minutes ahead of schedule, pool play about 20 minutes ahead of schedule), confidence and excitement for students from powers, and good quality competition.

I can't discuss the questions until after the 30th (because the Armstrong site won't play until then), but I will say this much:

I'm sold. It's a better game. Count me in as part of those obscure teams that are embracing "good quiz bowl." If some people don't like that, then oh well. I can't control that. All I can control is encouraging my students to play better, and I can focus more on game strategy when I coach.
Jay Winter
Greenville HS (IL) Scholastic Bowl Coach and Chief UN Translator for Math
Decatur MacArthur Class of 1990 - Illinois State Class of 1994 - MS Ed SIU Edwardsville 2010
Harley-Davidson owner since 2009
Fan of Good Questions

User avatar
at your pleasure
Auron
Posts: 1712
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 7:56 pm

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by at your pleasure »

Jacopo Robusti wrote:
Dan-Don wrote:
Oliver Ellsworth wrote:moderators who actively mock the good aspects of the format,
This sounds hilarious. Elaborate?
Ma. Also, she (and someone else, I guess) basically said "Well we can play without the blurt rule, but I think that the blurt rule is good and we're gonna play with it.
Wait, can someone explain to me what purpose the blurt rule even ostensibly serves?
Douglas Graebner, Walt Whitman HS 10, Uchicago 14
"... imagination acts upon man as really as does gravitation, and may kill him as certainly as a dose of prussic acid."-Sir James Frazer,The Golden Bough

http://avorticistking.wordpress.com/

User avatar
Jane Fairfax
Wakka
Posts: 136
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 10:54 pm

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Jane Fairfax »

Doink the Clown wrote:
Jacopo Robusti wrote:
Dan-Don wrote:
Oliver Ellsworth wrote:moderators who actively mock the good aspects of the format,
This sounds hilarious. Elaborate?
Ma. Also, she (and someone else, I guess) basically said "Well we can play without the blurt rule, but I think that the blurt rule is good and we're gonna play with it.
Wait, can someone explain to me what purpose the blurt rule even ostensibly serves?
I think maybe it was put in effect to prevent kids from saying the answer when they hadn't buzzed in. It ended up creating a much bigger problem than it solved.
Lloyd Sy
Auburn 2012
Brown 2016

User avatar
Edward Elric
Tidus
Posts: 506
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 11:31 pm
Location: Wheaton, IL

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Edward Elric »

Doink the Clown wrote:
Jacopo Robusti wrote:
Dan-Don wrote:
Oliver Ellsworth wrote:moderators who actively mock the good aspects of the format,
This sounds hilarious. Elaborate?
Ma. Also, she (and someone else, I guess) basically said "Well we can play without the blurt rule, but I think that the blurt rule is good and we're gonna play with it.
Wait, can someone explain to me what purpose the blurt rule even ostensibly serves?
No real purpose just the old "game show mentality." As a person who played almost all my tournaments ever with that IT GETS FREAKIN ANNOYING.

edit: llyod's got a point too
Mike Perovanovic
University of Ill.-Chicago '13
Wheaton North '09

User avatar
Irreligion in Bangladesh
Auron
Posts: 2095
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 1:18 am
Location: Winnebago, IL

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Irreligion in Bangladesh »

Jacopo Robusti wrote:It was almost as if some of these people were bitter towards the fact that teams have been embracing good quiz bowl.
You'd be right - of the moderators you saw today, no less than 4 have told me that they "would never moderate that format again" when asked to help with Huskie Bowl. I assume it was their allegiance to Winnebago that saw them moderate today. Only one alum that worked today graduated after 2000, and they actively resent these questions because they're different than what they played back in the day. The extra length is unnecessary, the distribution is wrong, the questions are on obtuse topics, etc. etc., all the old tropes. It's everything we've been fighting against.
CometCoach72 wrote:The Turnabout (NAQT format) in Greenville today led to faster matches (the tournament finished 15 minutes ahead of schedule, pool play about 20 minutes ahead of schedule), confidence and excitement for students from powers, and good quality competition.
Congratulations - you experienced more good quizbowl today! It's always been my goal for Winnebago's tourney to be that, but A: using 30 seconds for the computational tossups, B: using 10 seconds for the bonus parts, C: not allow conferral during bonus parts, D: allowing bouncebacks for the bonus parts, E: allowing a non-zero amount of time to confer on the bounceback, F: using moderators whose experience is years of one-clue tossups and, as a result, have reading speeds that might get 10 tossups done if matches used 18 minute halves, and G: allowing teams to play 12 players on a team and substitute up to 3 times per game -- their insistence on all that ensures that matches take ~45 minutes and that I look like a big liar, having promised the land of milk, honey, and 8 rounds ending before 4 PM. Add in the fact that Winnebago refuses to use powers or negs, and I'd be surprised if anyone left the Winnebago tournament happy.
Brad Fischer
Head Editor, IHSA State Series
IHSSBCA Ombudsman

Winnebago HS ('06)
Northern Illinois University ('10)
Assistant Coach, IMSA (2010-12)
Coach, Keith Country Day School (2012-16)

User avatar
Irreligion in Bangladesh
Auron
Posts: 2095
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 1:18 am
Location: Winnebago, IL

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Irreligion in Bangladesh »

Jane Fairfax wrote:
Doink the Clown wrote:
Jacopo Robusti wrote:
Dan-Don wrote:
Oliver Ellsworth wrote:moderators who actively mock the good aspects of the format,
This sounds hilarious. Elaborate?
Ma. Also, she (and someone else, I guess) basically said "Well we can play without the blurt rule, but I think that the blurt rule is good and we're gonna play with it.
Wait, can someone explain to me what purpose the blurt rule even ostensibly serves?
I think maybe it was put in effect to prevent kids from saying the answer when they hadn't buzzed in. It ended up creating a much bigger problem than it solved.
Actually, not quite - the blurt rule was to prevent kids from saying the answer before the moderator recognized their buzz. It gives a player 5 points instead of 10 for being correct, which was seen as an improvement over being ruled incorrect. Instead, it's just annoying.
Brad Fischer
Head Editor, IHSA State Series
IHSSBCA Ombudsman

Winnebago HS ('06)
Northern Illinois University ('10)
Assistant Coach, IMSA (2010-12)
Coach, Keith Country Day School (2012-16)

Dan-Don
Yuna
Posts: 966
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 11:05 pm
Location: Evanston
Contact:

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Dan-Don »

Doink the Clown wrote:
Jacopo Robusti wrote:
Dan-Don wrote:
Oliver Ellsworth wrote:moderators who actively mock the good aspects of the format,
This sounds hilarious. Elaborate?
Ma. Also, she (and someone else, I guess) basically said "Well we can play without the blurt rule, but I think that the blurt rule is good and we're gonna play with it.
Wait, can someone explain to me what purpose the blurt rule even ostensibly serves?
No. No one can.

Anyways, I'm aware of the problems with NAQT. But as someone less than a year new to the good quizbowl community, I've always been indoctrinated with the idea that NAQT is like a bastard cousin of good quizbowl. There can't be an HSAPQ or house-written set every weekend, so NAQT helps us pass the time. It's not good quizbowl according to most defintions, but it's passable. It carries slightly more legitimacy than :chip: or the like. Like food from a diner, it won't be good, but it will satisfy your hunger (for academic buzzer competition.) I just don't think we should take it so seriously, but maybe that's just the way I've been brought up. That being said, I totally agree with Zahed and would like to see improvements, first in the minds of the proponents of bad quizbowl and then in the quality of NAQT.
Dan Donohue, Saint Viator ('10), Northwestern ('14), NAQT

User avatar
Charley Pride
Rikku
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 11:24 pm

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Charley Pride »

For the record, the blurt rule wasn't insisted upon by all moderators, and it was never enforced, as there was never cause for enforcement. Still, having a skunk in the room is having a skunk in the room, even if it never sprays its stink.


EDIT: Coherence is good.
Last edited by Charley Pride on Sat Jan 16, 2010 11:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Zahed Haseeb

Auburn High School 2010
University of Chicago 2014

User avatar
at your pleasure
Auron
Posts: 1712
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 7:56 pm

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by at your pleasure »

Oliver Ellsworth wrote: skunk room
Also, is it just me or are the SCT/ICT sets way better than the IS sets?
Douglas Graebner, Walt Whitman HS 10, Uchicago 14
"... imagination acts upon man as really as does gravitation, and may kill him as certainly as a dose of prussic acid."-Sir James Frazer,The Golden Bough

http://avorticistking.wordpress.com/

User avatar
abnormal abdomen
Rikku
Posts: 346
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 3:58 pm

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by abnormal abdomen »

styxman wrote: Actually, not quite - the blurt rule was to prevent kids from saying the answer before the moderator recognized their buzz. It gives a player 5 points instead of 10 for being correct, which was seen as an improvement over being ruled incorrect. Instead, it's just annoying.
I still don't understand why that's necessary. I feel like it's just something that was added so that moderators could get a "Ooh, look at me, I'm a moderator and I shall exert my iron fist of dominance on you".

Also, can someone explain to me this whole concept of NAQT having a distro for the SET as opposed to a distro for each ROUND? What does that accomplish?
Abid Haseeb
Auburn High School '12
Brown University '16
Writer, HSAPQ
Writer, NAQT

User avatar
Frater Taciturnus
Auron
Posts: 2463
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 1:26 pm
Location: Richmond, VA

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Frater Taciturnus »

Jacopo Robusti wrote:
Also, can someone explain to me this whole concept of NAQT having a distro for the SET as opposed to a distro for each ROUND? What does that accomplish?
It allows to exactly measure out categories that have distributions of less than one question per round in that category.
George Berry
[email protected]
--------------
J. Sargeant Reynolds CC 2008, 2009, 2014
Virginia Commonwealth 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013,
Douglas Freeman 2005, 2006, 2007

User avatar
Important Bird Area
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 5624
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2003 3:33 pm
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Contact:

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Important Bird Area »

Oliver Ellsworth wrote:lots of IS #92 problems
styxman wrote:I saw one and a half matches of IS 92 and I find it uplifting that I won't see any more of it. My jaw dropped after no less than 4 tossups and 4 bonuses - inane answer selection and immensely poor clue choices for otherwise acceptable answer selection.
Obviously we can't discuss question details, but please email me with the details on all of these issues. I'm sorry this set didn't meet the standards set by the first three sets this fall, and we'll do our best to fix any problems we can identify before this set is used again next weekend.
Jeff Hoppes
President, Northern California Quiz Bowl Alliance
former HSQB Chief Admin (2012-13)
VP for Communication and history subject editor, NAQT
Editor emeritus, ACF

"I wish to make some kind of joke about Jeff's love of birds, but I always fear he'll turn them on me Hitchcock-style." -Fred

User avatar
Irreligion in Bangladesh
Auron
Posts: 2095
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 1:18 am
Location: Winnebago, IL

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Irreligion in Bangladesh »

Jacopo Robusti wrote:
styxman wrote: Actually, not quite - the blurt rule was to prevent kids from saying the answer before the moderator recognized their buzz. It gives a player 5 points instead of 10 for being correct, which was seen as an improvement over being ruled incorrect. Instead, it's just annoying.
I still don't understand why that's necessary. I feel like it's just something that was added so that moderators could get a "Ooh, look at me, I'm a moderator and I shall exert my iron fist of dominance on you".
/taps nose knowingly, nodding slowly
Brad Fischer
Head Editor, IHSA State Series
IHSSBCA Ombudsman

Winnebago HS ('06)
Northern Illinois University ('10)
Assistant Coach, IMSA (2010-12)
Coach, Keith Country Day School (2012-16)

User avatar
Edward Elric
Tidus
Posts: 506
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 11:31 pm
Location: Wheaton, IL

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Edward Elric »

styxman wrote:
Jacopo Robusti wrote:
styxman wrote: Actually, not quite - the blurt rule was to prevent kids from saying the answer before the moderator recognized their buzz. It gives a player 5 points instead of 10 for being correct, which was seen as an improvement over being ruled incorrect. Instead, it's just annoying.
I still don't understand why that's necessary. I feel like it's just something that was added so that moderators could get a "Ooh, look at me, I'm a moderator and I shall exert my iron fist of dominance on you".
/taps nose knowingly, nodding slowly
:grin:
Mike Perovanovic
University of Ill.-Chicago '13
Wheaton North '09

User avatar
Charley Pride
Rikku
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 11:24 pm

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Charley Pride »

Frater Taciturnus wrote:
Jacopo Robusti wrote:
Also, can someone explain to me this whole concept of NAQT having a distro for the SET as opposed to a distro for each ROUND? What does that accomplish?
It allows to exactly measure out categories that have distributions of less than one question per round in that category.

I don't get it.
Zahed Haseeb

Auburn High School 2010
University of Chicago 2014

User avatar
Mechanical Beasts
Banned Cheater
Posts: 5673
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 10:50 pm

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Mechanical Beasts »

Oliver Ellsworth wrote:I don't get it.
You want 3/3 Myth: Egyptian. You have 15/15 packets. You do not want 1/1 or 1/0 or 0/1 Myth: Egyptian per packet. No, you want 3/3 per tournament.
Andrew Watkins

User avatar
Important Bird Area
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 5624
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2003 3:33 pm
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Contact:

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Important Bird Area »

Jacopo Robusti wrote:
Also, can someone explain to me this whole concept of NAQT having a distro for the SET as opposed to a distro for each ROUND? What does that accomplish?
Worth reminding everyone that we do balance each round to the best of our ability (see this thread, where I posted the round-by-round numbers for the 2009 SCT). (Yes, the exact distribution varies a little bit between rounds for the reasons George and Andy mention, but this is true of almost all tournaments.)
Jeff Hoppes
President, Northern California Quiz Bowl Alliance
former HSQB Chief Admin (2012-13)
VP for Communication and history subject editor, NAQT
Editor emeritus, ACF

"I wish to make some kind of joke about Jeff's love of birds, but I always fear he'll turn them on me Hitchcock-style." -Fred

User avatar
Down and out in Quintana Roo
Auron
Posts: 2907
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 7:25 am
Location: Camden, DE
Contact:

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Down and out in Quintana Roo »

IS-92 huh? Great, can't wait to see this one in February at our State Championship... trash and general knowledge bullcrap, here we come.
Mr. Andrew Chrzanowski
Caesar Rodney High School
Camden, Delaware
CRHS '97-'01
University of Delaware '01-'05
CRHS quizbowl coach '06-'12
http://crquizbowl.edublogs.org

User avatar
abnormal abdomen
Rikku
Posts: 346
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 3:58 pm

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by abnormal abdomen »

Dr. Isaac Yankem, DDS wrote:IS-92 huh? Great, can't wait to see this one in February at our State Championship... trash and general knowledge bullcrap, here we come.
Wait, you guys are going to be playing what we played today for your State Championship...?

And, okay, I definitely understand the whole idea of the distribution by set; I guess my initial problem was actually with the distribution of today's set, not the methodology of it. I'm aware that NAQT has a different distro than, say, HSAPQ, but still.
Abid Haseeb
Auburn High School '12
Brown University '16
Writer, HSAPQ
Writer, NAQT

User avatar
Important Bird Area
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 5624
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2003 3:33 pm
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Contact:

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Important Bird Area »

Jacopo Robusti wrote:I guess my initial problem was actually with the distribution of today's set, not the methodology of it.
For that reason we'll have to take this to email (so I can go ahead with "ok, the physics tossup in round 3 was [answer line]" kind of stuff).
Jeff Hoppes
President, Northern California Quiz Bowl Alliance
former HSQB Chief Admin (2012-13)
VP for Communication and history subject editor, NAQT
Editor emeritus, ACF

"I wish to make some kind of joke about Jeff's love of birds, but I always fear he'll turn them on me Hitchcock-style." -Fred

jonah
Auron
Posts: 2332
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:51 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by jonah »

Stop going to tournaments run badly and with bad, unfair rules. You already have IHSA and Masonic that you have to put up with for that kind of crap; don't bring any more of it on yourselves.
Jonah Greenthal
National Academic Quiz Tournaments

User avatar
Charley Pride
Rikku
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 11:24 pm

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Charley Pride »

jonah wrote:Stop going to tournaments run badly and with bad, unfair rules. You already have IHSA and Masonic that you have to put up with for that kind of crap; don't bring any more of it on yourselves.
This is obvious. I wasn't very enthusiastic about going, but the rationale was that, without Winnebago, we would have gone a long time without playing. I don't even know how valid this reason is, but it doesn't matter. I'm more focused on NAQT's problems, as well as on a tournament that has incompletely adopted good quiz bowl.
Zahed Haseeb

Auburn High School 2010
University of Chicago 2014

User avatar
Boeing X-20, Please!
Rikku
Posts: 406
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 2:40 pm
Location: Evanston, IL

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Boeing X-20, Please! »

Oliver Ellsworth wrote:
jonah wrote:Stop going to tournaments run badly and with bad, unfair rules. You already have IHSA and Masonic that you have to put up with for that kind of crap; don't bring any more of it on yourselves.
This is obvious. I wasn't very enthusiastic about going, but the rationale was that, without Winnebago, we would have gone a long time without playing. I don't even know how valid this reason is, but it doesn't matter. I'm more focused on NAQT's problems, as well as on a tournament that has incompletely adopted good quiz bowl.
That's obviously why you come moderate at D&G and subsequently whoop all of the non-high schoolers in the match afterwards...duh
Nolan Winkler
Loyola Academy '12
UChicago '16

User avatar
Irreligion in Bangladesh
Auron
Posts: 2095
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 1:18 am
Location: Winnebago, IL

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Irreligion in Bangladesh »

Oliver Ellsworth wrote:
jonah wrote:Stop going to tournaments run badly and with bad, unfair rules. You already have IHSA and Masonic that you have to put up with for that kind of crap; don't bring any more of it on yourselves.
This is obvious. I wasn't very enthusiastic about going, but the rationale was that, without Winnebago, we would have gone a long time without playing. I don't even know how valid this reason is, but it doesn't matter. I'm more focused on NAQT's problems, as well as on a tournament that has incompletely adopted good quiz bowl.
You've still gone a long time without playing quizbowl. Sorry. You should've just come over to Kristin's house and scrimmaged against me. Maybe we could've pilfered ACF Winter or something. Hey - idea for next year, let's mirror ACF Winter at my house.

EDIT: Nolan's right, too - if there's no good Varsity, run a good F/S or Novice and moderate. In a related note, good job doing that, Auburn and Loyola.
Brad Fischer
Head Editor, IHSA State Series
IHSSBCA Ombudsman

Winnebago HS ('06)
Northern Illinois University ('10)
Assistant Coach, IMSA (2010-12)
Coach, Keith Country Day School (2012-16)

User avatar
at your pleasure
Auron
Posts: 1712
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 7:56 pm

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by at your pleasure »

styxman wrote:
Oliver Ellsworth wrote:
jonah wrote:Stop going to tournaments run badly and with bad, unfair rules. You already have IHSA and Masonic that you have to put up with for that kind of crap; don't bring any more of it on yourselves.
This is obvious. I wasn't very enthusiastic about going, but the rationale was that, without Winnebago, we would have gone a long time without playing. I don't even know how valid this reason is, but it doesn't matter. I'm more focused on NAQT's problems, as well as on a tournament that has incompletely adopted good quiz bowl.
You've still gone a long time without playing quizbowl. Sorry. You should've just come over to Kristin's house and scrimmaged against me. Maybe we could've pilfered ACF Winter or something. Hey - idea for next year, let's mirror ACF Winter at my house.

EDIT: Nolan's right, too - if there's no good Varsity, run a good F/S or Novice and moderate. In a related note, good job doing that, Auburn and Loyola.
Would taking your team to ACF Winter have been possible?
Douglas Graebner, Walt Whitman HS 10, Uchicago 14
"... imagination acts upon man as really as does gravitation, and may kill him as certainly as a dose of prussic acid."-Sir James Frazer,The Golden Bough

http://avorticistking.wordpress.com/

User avatar
Charley Pride
Rikku
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 11:24 pm

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Charley Pride »

Doink the Clown wrote:
styxman wrote:
Oliver Ellsworth wrote:
jonah wrote:Stop going to tournaments run badly and with bad, unfair rules. You already have IHSA and Masonic that you have to put up with for that kind of crap; don't bring any more of it on yourselves.
This is obvious. I wasn't very enthusiastic about going, but the rationale was that, without Winnebago, we would have gone a long time without playing. I don't even know how valid this reason is, but it doesn't matter. I'm more focused on NAQT's problems, as well as on a tournament that has incompletely adopted good quiz bowl.
You've still gone a long time without playing quizbowl. Sorry. You should've just come over to Kristin's house and scrimmaged against me. Maybe we could've pilfered ACF Winter or something. Hey - idea for next year, let's mirror ACF Winter at my house.

EDIT: Nolan's right, too - if there's no good Varsity, run a good F/S or Novice and moderate. In a related note, good job doing that, Auburn and Loyola.
Would taking your team to ACF Winter have been possible?
Our school has been completely awful about letting us do out of the ordinary things like this. Plus, we would have lacked transportation.
Zahed Haseeb

Auburn High School 2010
University of Chicago 2014

User avatar
Down and out in Quintana Roo
Auron
Posts: 2907
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 7:25 am
Location: Camden, DE
Contact:

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Down and out in Quintana Roo »

Uh, just go anyway?
Mr. Andrew Chrzanowski
Caesar Rodney High School
Camden, Delaware
CRHS '97-'01
University of Delaware '01-'05
CRHS quizbowl coach '06-'12
http://crquizbowl.edublogs.org

Charbroil
Auron
Posts: 1145
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2006 11:52 am
Location: St. Charles, MO

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Charbroil »

Dr. Isaac Yankem, DDS wrote:Uh, just go anyway?
Given that the nearest ACF Winter sites seem to have been in Michigan, Minnesota, and southwestern Missouri, this seems to be a bit of a flippant comment?

Edit: Yes, I know those aren't impossible distances to travel, but at least in my mind, it doesn't seem as if you can offhandedly criticize someone for not traveling 6+ hours instead of going to the tournament an hour or two away on questions which, regardless of NAQT's issues, aren't really that bad.

Anyway, in the interest of making this not entirely a meta-post, may I ask whether the distributional issues you ran into were anything more than what you could have realized by reading NAQT's distribution?: http://www.naqt.com/hs/distribution.jsp I mean, these criticisms (except for comments about repeats and such) seem to be over problems that people are already familiar with, so I'm curious as to whether there were any new issues.
Last edited by Charbroil on Sun Jan 17, 2010 1:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
Charles Hang
Francis Howell Central '09
St. Charles Community College '14
Washington University in St. Louis '19 (President, 2017-19)

Owner, Olympia Academic Competition Questions, LLC
Question Writer, National Academic Quiz Tournaments, LLC and National History Bee and Bowl

User avatar
Irreligion in Bangladesh
Auron
Posts: 2095
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 1:18 am
Location: Winnebago, IL

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Irreligion in Bangladesh »

Dr. Isaac Yankem, DDS wrote:Uh, just go anyway?
Winter's in Michigan, unfortunately. Generally speaking, though, yeah, that's what I'd suggest too.
Brad Fischer
Head Editor, IHSA State Series
IHSSBCA Ombudsman

Winnebago HS ('06)
Northern Illinois University ('10)
Assistant Coach, IMSA (2010-12)
Coach, Keith Country Day School (2012-16)

User avatar
Down and out in Quintana Roo
Auron
Posts: 2907
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 7:25 am
Location: Camden, DE
Contact:

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Down and out in Quintana Roo »

styxman wrote:
Dr. Isaac Yankem, DDS wrote:Uh, just go anyway?
Winter's in Michigan, unfortunately. Generally speaking, though, yeah, that's what I'd suggest too.
My point was in general not just specific to ACF Winter... just go to anything, anyway.
Mr. Andrew Chrzanowski
Caesar Rodney High School
Camden, Delaware
CRHS '97-'01
University of Delaware '01-'05
CRHS quizbowl coach '06-'12
http://crquizbowl.edublogs.org

User avatar
Charley Pride
Rikku
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 11:24 pm

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Charley Pride »

Dr. Isaac Yankem, DDS wrote:Uh, just go anyway?
This is a frustrating comment. We have experience with breaking rules and pushing limits, and we're not stupid. We've had all sorts of trouble with a new AD, and with a new principal, we have no idea what kind of latitude we'll have. I really don't care who we offend from our school or district if I know we're doing the right thing, but the issue is that we can't do things like pay for PACE if we lose eligibility, which has been threatened by administration before. I hate it, it's stupid, but I have to deal with it for the time being.

And let me make it clear that, while I have a strong say in what the team does, I can't and don't make any final decisions.
Zahed Haseeb

Auburn High School 2010
University of Chicago 2014

User avatar
Edward Elric
Tidus
Posts: 506
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 11:31 pm
Location: Wheaton, IL

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Edward Elric »

Dr. Isaac Yankem, DDS wrote:
styxman wrote:
Dr. Isaac Yankem, DDS wrote:Uh, just go anyway?
Winter's in Michigan, unfortunately. Generally speaking, though, yeah, that's what I'd suggest too.
My point was in general not just specific to ACF Winter... just go to anything, anyway.
You forget that a majority of Illinois Teams never leave the state for tournaments. Not saying that Auburn wouldn't though.
Mike Perovanovic
University of Ill.-Chicago '13
Wheaton North '09

User avatar
Down and out in Quintana Roo
Auron
Posts: 2907
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 7:25 am
Location: Camden, DE
Contact:

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Down and out in Quintana Roo »

Oliver Ellsworth wrote:
Dr. Isaac Yankem, DDS wrote:Uh, just go anyway?
This is a frustrating comment. We have experience with breaking rules and pushing limits, and we're not stupid. We've had all sorts of trouble with a new AD, and with a new principal, we have no idea what kind of latitude we'll have. I really don't care who we offend from our school or district if I know we're doing the right thing, but the issue is that we can't do things like pay for PACE if we lose eligibility, which has been threatened by administration before. I hate it, it's stupid, but I have to deal with it for the time being.

And let me make it clear that, while I have a strong say in what the team does, I can't and don't make any final decisions.
You're saying you can't play quizbowl for fun in another setting?

Or, your school's basketball team (or just 5 players) can't play a pickup game on the street with some other guys from around town? If so, then you should be able to drive to any quizbowl tournament you darn well please and just call yourself Ockford Rauburn or whatever.
Mr. Andrew Chrzanowski
Caesar Rodney High School
Camden, Delaware
CRHS '97-'01
University of Delaware '01-'05
CRHS quizbowl coach '06-'12
http://crquizbowl.edublogs.org

User avatar
Mechanical Beasts
Banned Cheater
Posts: 5673
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 10:50 pm

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Mechanical Beasts »

Dude, you do realize that we're all familiar with "don't call yourself by your school's name," right? That ploy doesn't procure transportation to a tournament 270, 330, or 415 miles away. Give them at least a little bit of a break; if they can't find transportation, hitchhiking isn't an option.
Andrew Watkins

User avatar
Down and out in Quintana Roo
Auron
Posts: 2907
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 7:25 am
Location: Camden, DE
Contact:

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Down and out in Quintana Roo »

Crazy Andy Watkins wrote:Dude, you do realize that we're all familiar with "don't call yourself by your school's name," right? That ploy doesn't procure transportation to a tournament 270, 330, or 415 miles away. Give them at least a little bit of a break; if they can't find transportation, hitchhiking isn't an option.
I'm just trying to understand this crazy state's rules. Sorry for hijacking the thread.
Mr. Andrew Chrzanowski
Caesar Rodney High School
Camden, Delaware
CRHS '97-'01
University of Delaware '01-'05
CRHS quizbowl coach '06-'12
http://crquizbowl.edublogs.org

jonah
Auron
Posts: 2332
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:51 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by jonah »

Dr. Isaac Yankem, DDS wrote:You're saying you can't play quizbowl for fun in another setting?

Or, your school's basketball team (or just 5 players) can't play a pickup game on the street with some other guys from around town? If so, then you should be able to drive to any quizbowl tournament you darn well please and just call yourself Ockford Rauburn or whatever.
The IHSA and lots of similar organizations are saying precisely both of those things, including the basketball one.
Jonah Greenthal
National Academic Quiz Tournaments

User avatar
Charley Pride
Rikku
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 11:24 pm

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Charley Pride »

Dr. Isaac Yankem, DDS wrote:
Oliver Ellsworth wrote:
Dr. Isaac Yankem, DDS wrote:Uh, just go anyway?
This is a frustrating comment. We have experience with breaking rules and pushing limits, and we're not stupid. We've had all sorts of trouble with a new AD, and with a new principal, we have no idea what kind of latitude we'll have. I really don't care who we offend from our school or district if I know we're doing the right thing, but the issue is that we can't do things like pay for PACE if we lose eligibility, which has been threatened by administration before. I hate it, it's stupid, but I have to deal with it for the time being.

And let me make it clear that, while I have a strong say in what the team does, I can't and don't make any final decisions.
You're saying you can't play quizbowl for fun in another setting?

Or, your school's basketball team (or just 5 players) can't play a pickup game on the street with some other guys from around town? If so, then you should be able to drive to any quizbowl tournament you darn well please and just call yourself Ockford Rauburn or whatever.
There's an issue our athletic/activities director has with taking any risks with rules. In this case, it's attending tournaments not sanctioned by our state athletics governing body, as well as with transportation in either a district-provided or district-approved mode of transportation (parent with background check, etc). It's a shitstorm.

So far we've been able to re-establish that non-IHSA tournaments are okay. Now we're dealing with the out of state travel plus transportation.

To make things uglier, district administration dictates that we submit forms thirty days before departing for any event over 50 miles away. Our school administration approved us less than a month ago, so we wouldn't have been able to sign up for ACF Winter in time. Rockford (and Illinois) adores red tape.

This year has been a frustrating mess. I just want to play good quiz bowl, and people who have no idea what they're doing are making it harder. I don't need people blaming me for it.
Zahed Haseeb

Auburn High School 2010
University of Chicago 2014

User avatar
at your pleasure
Auron
Posts: 1712
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 7:56 pm

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by at your pleasure »

Oliver Ellsworth wrote:
Dr. Isaac Yankem, DDS wrote:
Oliver Ellsworth wrote:
Dr. Isaac Yankem, DDS wrote:Uh, just go anyway?
This is a frustrating comment. We have experience with breaking rules and pushing limits, and we're not stupid. We've had all sorts of trouble with a new AD, and with a new principal, we have no idea what kind of latitude we'll have. I really don't care who we offend from our school or district if I know we're doing the right thing, but the issue is that we can't do things like pay for PACE if we lose eligibility, which has been threatened by administration before. I hate it, it's stupid, but I have to deal with it for the time being.

And let me make it clear that, while I have a strong say in what the team does, I can't and don't make any final decisions.
You're saying you can't play quizbowl for fun in another setting?

Or, your school's basketball team (or just 5 players) can't play a pickup game on the street with some other guys from around town? If so, then you should be able to drive to any quizbowl tournament you darn well please and just call yourself Ockford Rauburn or whatever.
There's an issue our athletic/activities director has with taking any risks with rules. In this case, it's attending tournaments not sanctioned by our state athletics governing body, as well as with transportation in either a district-provided or district-approved mode of transportation (parent with background check, etc). It's a shitstorm.

So far we've been able to re-establish that non-IHSA tournaments are okay. Now we're dealing with the out of state travel plus transportation.

To make things uglier, district administration dictates that we submit forms thirty days before departing for any event over 50 miles away. Our school administration approved us less than a month ago, so we wouldn't have been able to sign up for ACF Winter in time. Rockford (and Illinois) adores red tape.

This year has been a frustrating mess. I just want to play good quiz bowl, and people who have no idea what they're doing are making it harder. I don't need people blaming me for it.
Dear god. I don't know how the hell you can stand all that. At this point, it almost makes sense to separate the quizbowl club from the IHSA team somehow.
Douglas Graebner, Walt Whitman HS 10, Uchicago 14
"... imagination acts upon man as really as does gravitation, and may kill him as certainly as a dose of prussic acid."-Sir James Frazer,The Golden Bough

http://avorticistking.wordpress.com/

User avatar
Charley Pride
Rikku
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 11:24 pm

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Charley Pride »

Doink the Clown wrote:
Oliver Ellsworth wrote:
Dr. Isaac Yankem, DDS wrote:
Oliver Ellsworth wrote:
Dr. Isaac Yankem, DDS wrote:Uh, just go anyway?
This is a frustrating comment. We have experience with breaking rules and pushing limits, and we're not stupid. We've had all sorts of trouble with a new AD, and with a new principal, we have no idea what kind of latitude we'll have. I really don't care who we offend from our school or district if I know we're doing the right thing, but the issue is that we can't do things like pay for PACE if we lose eligibility, which has been threatened by administration before. I hate it, it's stupid, but I have to deal with it for the time being.

And let me make it clear that, while I have a strong say in what the team does, I can't and don't make any final decisions.
You're saying you can't play quizbowl for fun in another setting?

Or, your school's basketball team (or just 5 players) can't play a pickup game on the street with some other guys from around town? If so, then you should be able to drive to any quizbowl tournament you darn well please and just call yourself Ockford Rauburn or whatever.
There's an issue our athletic/activities director has with taking any risks with rules. In this case, it's attending tournaments not sanctioned by our state athletics governing body, as well as with transportation in either a district-provided or district-approved mode of transportation (parent with background check, etc). It's a shitstorm.

So far we've been able to re-establish that non-IHSA tournaments are okay. Now we're dealing with the out of state travel plus transportation.

To make things uglier, district administration dictates that we submit forms thirty days before departing for any event over 50 miles away. Our school administration approved us less than a month ago, so we wouldn't have been able to sign up for ACF Winter in time. Rockford (and Illinois) adores red tape.

This year has been a frustrating mess. I just want to play good quiz bowl, and people who have no idea what they're doing are making it harder. I don't need people blaming me for it.
Dear god. I don't know how the hell you can stand all that. At this point, it almost makes sense to separate the quizbowl club from the IHSA team somehow.
Already done. Now we're fighting over how the club is paid for. And how we allocate proceeds from stuff we host or win. And how we travel.
Zahed Haseeb

Auburn High School 2010
University of Chicago 2014

User avatar
Irreligion in Bangladesh
Auron
Posts: 2095
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 1:18 am
Location: Winnebago, IL

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Irreligion in Bangladesh »

Oliver Ellsworth wrote:Already done. Now we're fighting over how the club is paid for. And how we allocate proceeds from stuff we host or win. And how we travel.
Wait, wait, you guys deaffiliated? Sweet! Give us more details!
Brad Fischer
Head Editor, IHSA State Series
IHSSBCA Ombudsman

Winnebago HS ('06)
Northern Illinois University ('10)
Assistant Coach, IMSA (2010-12)
Coach, Keith Country Day School (2012-16)

User avatar
Charley Pride
Rikku
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 11:24 pm

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Charley Pride »

styxman wrote:
Oliver Ellsworth wrote:Already done. Now we're fighting over how the club is paid for. And how we allocate proceeds from stuff we host or win. And how we travel.
Wait, wait, you guys deaffiliated? Sweet! Give us more details!
No, we mitosised.
Zahed Haseeb

Auburn High School 2010
University of Chicago 2014

User avatar
Irreligion in Bangladesh
Auron
Posts: 2095
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 1:18 am
Location: Winnebago, IL

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by Irreligion in Bangladesh »

Oliver Ellsworth wrote:
styxman wrote:
Oliver Ellsworth wrote:Already done. Now we're fighting over how the club is paid for. And how we allocate proceeds from stuff we host or win. And how we travel.
Wait, wait, you guys deaffiliated? Sweet! Give us more details!
No, we mitosised.
Right, it's weak deaffiliation (as opposed to the strong version, which involves FedExing the IHSA a turd sandwich). I still want details!
Brad Fischer
Head Editor, IHSA State Series
IHSSBCA Ombudsman

Winnebago HS ('06)
Northern Illinois University ('10)
Assistant Coach, IMSA (2010-12)
Coach, Keith Country Day School (2012-16)

User avatar
TheDoctor
Rikku
Posts: 380
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 12:34 pm

Re: NAQT: Who You Attempting to Fool?

Post by TheDoctor »

Oliver Ellsworth wrote:Already done. Now we're fighting over how the club is paid for. And how we allocate proceeds from stuff we host or win. And how we travel.
Congratulations!
Kristin Strey
SCOP
Head Coach, Winnebago High School (2014-)
Assistant Coach, IMSA (2010-2012)
Northern Illinois University Quiz Bowl Association founder

Locked